Questions you'd like answers to... #2

[Mimsy2]

I believe that is the crux of this case....you have evidence pointing in 4 different directions. You have the last 3 to see her alive only cooperative to their demands. You also have detectives leaning this way and that....not to mention ameture sleuths. It is only unsloveable because you have 4 probable outcomes.....even if you apply computer programming logic....you have a never ending loop....python!!! Yes IMO!! IF...AND I MEAN IF!!! we had/have phone logs it would prove some point..IMOO. IF, you have a phone log that states the R's called defense Att's before 911..well there is problem 1...what do you need a defense before you report a "missing " child????
This child is missing and not yet known to be kidnapped....IF YOU call after you know the child is kidnapped and missing and possibly dead...How do you know that you need a defense???
Enquiring mind's want to know these answers...unfortunately buried behind who knows what, we may never know...unfortunately for this little girl, and believe me it tears me apart!!!! LE turned about constable looking at the left and right hands and we may never, ever know what truly went down. I have been down so many rabbit holes with this case only to end with a pardon me, WTF??? I would love to sit down with hard cold facts, and investigators and the realisinims of this case!!! There are answers....the truth always rears its ugly head!!!

All of this is IMOO ONLY...NOT TAKES FRLM ANYONE OTHER THAY MYSELF...UPON TRING TO FIND A REAL ANSWER!!!!

 

[UKGuy]

I believe that is the crux of this case....you have evidence pointing in 4 different directions. You have the last 3 to see her alive only cooperative to their demands. You also have detectives leaning this way and that....not to mention ameture sleuths. It is only unsloveable because you have 4 probable outcomes.....even if you apply computer programming logic....you have a never ending loop....python!!! Yes IMO!! IF...AND I MEAN IF!!! we had/have phone logs it would prove some point..IMOO. IF, you have a phone log that states the R's called defense Att's before 911..well there is problem 1...what do you need a defense before you report a "missing " child????
This child is missing and not yet known to be kidnapped....IF YOU call after you know the child is kidnapped and missing and possibly dead...How do you know that you need a defense???
Enquiring mind's want to know these answers...unfortunately buried behind who knows what, we may never know...unfortunately for this little girl, and believe me it tears me apart!!!! LE turned about constable looking at the left and right hands and we may never, ever know what truly went down. I have been down so many rabbit holes with this case only to end with a pardon me, WTF??? I would love to sit down with hard cold facts, and investigators and the realisinims of this case!!! There are answers....the truth always rears its ugly head!!!

All of this is IMOO ONLY...NOT TAKES FRLM ANYONE OTHER THAY MYSELF...UPON TRING TO FIND A REAL ANSWER!!!!

Mimsy2,
From memory The R's had Private Eyes knocking on doors the same day JonBenet was found dead in the wine-cellar, e.g. Fleet White, how did they manage that, or is my memory mistaken?

There is no evidence of an intruder, no fibers, no prints, no identifiable dna, nothing, zilch!

Basically someone in the house whacked JonBenet subsequently she entered a coma, later she was ligature asphyxiated.

The rest is all staging right down to the size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear she was found wearing.

Patently one of the Ramsey's whacked JonBenet after arriving back home from the White's Christmas Party, then attempted to cover it all up.

One of the Grand Juries True Bills was COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime) suggesting both parents did stage the crime-scene?

Another Grand Jury True Bill was COUNT IV (Child Abuse resulting in Death), i.e. neglect and/or indifference to JonBenet's welfare?

You can make a case for any of PDI, JDI, or BDI since all three colluded post-mortem to assist each other, consider Burke faking being asleep that morning?

Your choice of RDI will likely rest on what you think the initial motive was, e.g. sexual, or anger, etc.

No rabbit holes are required just plain common sense.

.

 

[proust20]

I agree that whether you decide on a sexual motivation, or rather, an impulsive moment of rage, it shall determine your choice of which R is the killer.

 

[UKGuy]

I agree that whether you decide on a sexual motivation, or rather, an impulsive moment of rage, it shall determine your choice of which R is the killer.

proust20,
Sure and if you take into account that the Grand Jury took evidence from Coroner Meyer where he would have expanded on his postmortem remarks about Digital Penetration and Sexual Contact and that Dr. Andrew Sirontak, Chief of Denver Children’s Hospital Child Protection Team agreed with Coroner Meyer's initial findings after returning to the morgue and assessing JonBenet's internal injuries for himself.

I reckon Coroner Meyer opted for a second opinion in case JonBenet's injuries had been staged and he might have been duped?

.

 

[proust20]

If you divide the motive for the murder between anger and a sexual aspect, BR is the one of the Rs who most likely could have been activated by either.

 

[Algo214]

Why in the world did they allow people in and out
Why or how did John rush to the cellar like a hound
What (really) led the DA to disregard the Grand Jury and not indict.

There is too many

 

[Veronica Lodge]

If you divide the motive for the murder between anger and a sexual aspect, BR is the one of the Rs who most likely could have been activated by either.

I have to disagree with this. I think JR would have been more likely. BR was nine (ok, nearly ten) at the time. JR was a randy, controlling, middle aged man who was used to getting what he wanted, when he wanted.

 

[proust20]

I agree that JR could possibly be motivated by sexual needs. However, I do not see him suddenly losing it all in a homicidal fit of rage.

 

[UKGuy]

I agree that JR could possibly be motivated by sexual needs. However, I do not see him suddenly losing it all in a homicidal fit of rage.

proust20,
Totally agree with you on this. If you consider everything in the round there was no need for any Ramsey to use violence to further their ends, i.e. the violence was not a precursor to sexual activity.

I reckon we have two possible options:

1. JonBenet being whacked is part of some sexual activity gone wrong?

2. JonBenet being whacked and the accompanying contusions and abrasions are the result of a homicidal fit of rage, all the rest being staging?

Currently I favor 2.

The scenario I can imagine is JonBenet not wanting to repeat whatever took place on Christmas Eve, just consider Patsy's remarks here.

This covers the majority of all the forensic bases, excepting what we do not know for certain.

.

 

[UKGuy]

I have to disagree with this. I think JR would have been more likely. BR was nine (ok, nearly ten) at the time. JR was a randy, controlling, middle aged man who was used to getting what he wanted, when he wanted.

Veronica Lodge,
Sure, but the male stereotype does not match what the forensic evidence suggests did take place.

.

 

[David Rogers]

Why in the world did they allow people in and out
Why or how did John rush to the cellar like a hound
What (really) led the DA to disregard the Grand Jury and not indict.

There is too many

If Burke was involved, I say the fix was in within 24 hours. Why would the DA put up such a wall to the investigation? It is all about protecting a minor. They were required by law to protect him and his identity.

 

[UKGuy]

If Burke was involved, I say the fix was in within 24 hours. Why would the DA put up such a wall to the investigation? It is all about protecting a minor. They were required by law to protect him and his identity.

David Rogers,
The fix began early morning of the 26th, John likely phoned for legal advice, from then on a cleanup operation was underway with all the fixers appointed, civil and legal, with no expense spared.

This would later include most of the facts itemized in PMPT, etc. DA Hunter does not want any involvement in the case prior to the GJ to be public knowledge.

Team Ramsey nearly buried the case, they never banked on some of the True Bills being published, so John Ramsey has to keep popping up in documentaries to remind everyone it was an Intruder Who Did It!

.

 

[tc505]

Edpower,

Hello there friend!
The case of JonBenet Ramsey has been one that has puzzled the members of our nation for almost two decades. I was the same age as JonBenet when she was murdered and as a child, I blamed her death as the reason why my mother wouldn't let me participate in pageants. I used to be so angry!

As I grew up; I followed her case closely and always held closely to the theories that I formulated hoping the case would be solved and I would have guessed the correct killer. Sadly, her case is still unsolved and we are no closer to learning who took the life of that sweet, little Boulder CO native than we were on that Christmas Day in 1996.

I have held my theories that it was different members of her family that had a hand in her death however the older I got, the more I remained to hold one theory as most viable.

I truly believe that her older brother BR had been sexually abusing her for quite some time before her death and while during previous instances of her abuse; she had remained quiet on this night, she was not causing the blunt force trauma to her head. I truly believe that BR used the strangulation as a means and method to keep her quiet permanently and when he realized that he had devised no way to simply claim "she ran away" because he couldn't dispose of her body. He simply grabbed his mother's notepad and wrote what he had probably seen before in many a murder mystery or kidnapping.

I think his parents did what any parents would do and did their best to cover up his participation in this brutal crime.

A couple things that have always bothered me in regards to this case was #1) the fact that PR claimed BR was still asleep when she made the 911 call however upon further examination big brother can be heard in the background on the 911 tapes. #2) it was said that JonBenet wanted to stay up to wait for Santa however, why would she be waiting for Santa on Christmas night when any child knows Santa comes on Christmas Eve?

Hi! I'm new here and I hope I am doing this correctly. I have heard a few podcasts cover this story and the part about JonBenet Ramsey waiting for Santa on Christmas night caught my attention because it was reported that a friend of the family had dressed like Santa for a Christmas party that the family had attended. Allegedly this person had told JonBenet that she would get a special visit from Santa and I'm wondering how thoroughly the PD investigated this angle.

 

[Tadpole12]

s-neighbors-barbara-kostanick.htm

Neighbours - Barbara Kostanick
(Santa "Special Visit" source)

 

[icedtea4me]

I agree that JR could possibly be motivated by sexual needs. However, I do not see him suddenly losing it all in a homicidal fit of rage.

Why can't one person go into a homicidal rage because of another person's sexual needs?

 

[Mimsy2]

Mimsy2,
From memory The R's had Private Eyes knocking on doors the same day JonBenet was found dead in the wine-cellar, e.g. Fleet White, how did they manage that, or is my memory mistaken?

There is no evidence of an intruder, no fibers, no prints, no identifiable dna, nothing, zilch!

Basically someone in the house whacked JonBenet subsequently she entered a coma, later she was ligature asphyxiated.

The rest is all staging right down to the size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear she was found wearing.

Patently one of the Ramsey's whacked JonBenet after arriving back home from the White's Christmas Party, then attempted to cover it all up.

One of the Grand Juries True Bills was COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime) suggesting both parents did stage the crime-scene?

Another Grand Jury True Bill was COUNT IV (Child Abuse resulting in Death), i.e. neglect and/or indifference to JonBenet's welfare?

You can make a case for any of PDI, JDI, or BDI since all three colluded post-mortem to assist each other, consider Burke faking being asleep that morning?

Your choice of RDI will likely rest on what you think the initial motive was, e.g. sexual, or anger, etc.

No rabbit holes are required just plain common sense.

.

I completely agree with you!!!
Sorry for the rambling in my previous post. I had, had a glass or two of wine. My point is/was, that it was imperfectly staged as a perfect scene. You had a murder staged as a kidnapping that included a ransom diatribe..er note. Only to be discovered later to be staged as a sexually motivated murder. It came complete with a household full of sympathetic friends who kindly trampled the crime scene. Some even cleaned areas of the house to help ensure evidence that may be lingering there was wiped away.
You have the B-Team police force with no experience with a kidnapping turned sexually motivated murder. The B-Team also fails to reject and/or clear the sympathizers, separate the parents and secure any and all crime scenes.
That is why we are still asking questions to this day. Granted we all have our favorite candidates and it is a solvable case. However, at the time the crime occurred and for years after, the problem with prosecution is you always bear the burden of proof. So much confusion surrounds the case because the crime scene was surrounded by confusion and that worked to the R's advantage.
Sure you can pick your RDI theory and run with it....It seems BPD did too. The problem lies with being able to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The R's definitely staged a scene that cast a lot of doubt by intentionally pointing the scene in different directions with the possibility of different scenarios played out by IMO 3 different people.

 

[Mimsy2]

I completely agree with you!!!
Sorry for the rambling in my previous post. I had, had a glass or two of wine. My point is/was, that it was imperfectly staged as a perfect scene. You had a murder staged as a kidnapping that included a ransom diatribe..er note. Only to be discovered later to be staged as a sexually motivated murder. It came complete with a household full of sympathetic friends who kindly trampled the crime scene. Some even cleaned areas of the house to help ensure evidence that may be lingering there was wiped away.
You have the B-Team police force with no experience with a kidnapping turned sexually motivated murder. The B-Team also fails to reject and/or clear the sympathizers, separate the parents and secure any and all crime scenes.
That is why we are still asking questions to this day. Granted we all have our favorite candidates and it is a solvable case. However, at the time the crime occurred and for years after, the problem with prosecution is you always bear the burden of proof. So much confusion surrounds the case because the crime scene was surrounded by confusion and that worked to the R's advantage.
Sure you can pick your RDI theory and run with it....It seems BPD did too. The problem lies with being able to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The R's definitely staged a scene that cast a lot of doubt by intentionally pointing the scene in different directions with the possibility of different scenarios played out by IMO 3 different people.

That is what I meant about going down rabbit holes...You have to vet out any and all theories to come to a satisfactory conclusion that matches evidence known to the public/us. It definitely IMO SCREAMS cover-up. I have my opinion as to whom is being covered for as do many others.

 

[UKGuy]

That is what I meant about going down rabbit holes...You have to vet out any and all theories to come to a satisfactory conclusion that matches evidence known to the public/us. It definitely IMO SCREAMS cover-up. I have my opinion as to whom is being covered for as do many others.

Mimsy2,
Sure, I agree with what you post. The thing is there is/was proof of who did what, e.g. dna test results, all of which have not been published, there is other forensic evidence yet to see daylight which would likely incriminate one of the R's.

You can also eliminate suspects by comparing and contrasting their statements and forensic evidence, an example of this might be PDI:

So if the case is PDI, how come Patsy left forensic evidence linked to her, e.g. hairs, dna, etc all over the wine-cellar, e.g. sticky side of the duct-tape on JonBenet's mouth.

Why did Patsy not anticipate questions regarding the size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear, she had no credible explanation, on this topic it was checkmate for the BPD.

Basically after the wine-cellar staging Patsy is in a worse position than if she had just left JonBenet in her bedroom, because none of Patsy's forensic markers should have been found in the wine-cellar as Patsy said she was never in this remote location.

Conclusion: Patsy was staging for someone else, on this the GJ seem to agree.

Similarly for John with fibers from his Israeli manufactured shirt being found on JonBenet's thighs, etc. Again the GJ appear to agree hitting JR with COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime), did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

Here the referenced person cannot be John otherwise he would be hit with a Homicide In The First Degree True Bill, and Count VII might look like this:
COUNT 7-MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (F1)

On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously alter, destroy, or conceal physical evidence with the intent to affect the outcome of a criminal investigation or court proceeding; in violation of section 18-3-102(1)(x), C.R.S.

Which might include redressing JonBenet in Burke Ramsey's long johns, all to lay a trail of confusing forensic evidence?

Which leaves the one person both parents are more likely to cover for than each other: Burke Ramsey.

So there is no smoking gun simply circumstantial evidence which appears to point in one direction?

.

 

[proust20]

BDI gains favor as it offers the best ability to piece together the available evidence. The GJ decision and its suppression bolster this theory.

Although, of course, it is just and only a theory. Loose ends dangle persistently in this case. A result of trying to make sense of the nonsensical? An aspect of BDI which I do not understand, as best I might, is the idea that the Rs acted so as to protect BR from the consequences of what he had done to his sister. OK - that at least has a connection to how people actually think and behave IRL, which is frequently absent with the Rs. However, if the Rs realized what BR had done, from what should they be shielding him? The Rs were not native to CO. Perhaps, they were or weren't aware that a 9 year-old cannot be prosecuted for the killing there. In the end, it was a moot point. BR could never have been imprisoned. On the other hand, a little boy, who happened to have killed his
sister on Christmas in one of the most bizarre cases in American history, might be in need of, shall we say, professional help.

If the Rs cared about BR, shouldn't they want him to be in the best environment for his health and well-being? If they knew that he had killed JB, shouldn't they be afraid that he'd strike again? Would they feel safe going to sleep with BR in the House?

A nine year old who isn't fully potty-trained is surely showing signs of developmental difficulty. What if any sort of therapy the kids may have received is unknown. BR's disastrous Norman Bates like-appearance on Dr. Phil indicates that these issues have not been resolved thoroughly. It seems that JAR has been moved currently to the front burner of the Ramsey soap opera, since BR is clearly now a liability as the Rs struggle nobly for Justice.

 

[tc505]

s-neighbors-barbara-kostanick.htm

Neighbours - Barbara Kostanick
(Santa "Special Visit" source)

Thanks for posting this source. There is a lot to comb through here. I think everyone in the family and close to the family, aside from BK and her daughter,are shady. Why would JB tell her friend and her friend's mom about the "secret santa" visit, but not her own mom? That, in itself, is suspicious. I know children aren't always open with their parents like they are with their friends but by outward appearances, PR was heavily involved with JB (pageants and such) and with BR,and especially at Christmas, she would have been excited to tell about a secret santa visit.
On another note about this secret santa possibility (Bill McReynolds). In this link, PR even said BM was very "fond of JB". "McReynolds seemed obsessed with JonBenet, say Ramsey insiders. He even credited her with helping him to fight back from the brink of death after a heart operation. And he called her an "angel" before the murder, ironically - the very word that Patsy later used." IMO this is just a weird relationship from the get go. And then this link quotes, "As GLOBE revealed exclusively, McReynolds' own daughter Jill was abducted as a 9-year-old in 1974 and her friend was molested. It happened on Dec. 26 - the same date that JonBenet's body was discovered." IMO he seems like the number one suspect and possibly her parents were in on this. Maybe they were in on this "friend"of theirs doing inappropriate things with their child.
There are so many details,rabbit trails and opinions on this case. I hope it gets solved.